[OPE-L:1150] Re: Re: Re: Re: Unproductive labour income and Marxian social accounts

From: Michael J Williams (michael@williamsmj.screaming.net)
Date: Wed Sep 08 1999 - 04:27:36 EDT

Just for the record, it is me, Michael Williams, not Jurriaan, who is
responsible for what Ajit, with his usual thought-through subtlety and
determination to engage with other people's views, here calls "sheer

----- Original Message -----
From: Ajit Sinha <ajitsinha@lbsnaa.ernet.in>
To: <ope-l@galaxy.csuchico.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 1999 7:47 PM
Subject: [OPE-L:1146] Re: Re: Re: Unproductive labour income and Marxian
social accounts

> Jurriaan Bendien wrote:
> > >I do not see that the inclusion of services under Commodity undermines
> > >anything but the long-discredited *embodied* labour theory of value.
Once we
> > >are in the realm of abstract labour accounting, the 'value theory of
> > >and a value-form view that value and money are two aspects of a single
> > >system, we are indeed better able to apply Marx's fundamental critique
> > >late second millenium capitalism.
> _____________________
> This is sheer nonsense! People who talk about "value theory of labor" etc.
> very little understanding of the value problematic. As far as "embodied
> theory of value" is concerned, it only means direct and indirect labor
time to
> reproduce the commodity at the time of its valuation. And i don't see by
> logic you argue that inclusion of services in productive labor category
> the embodied labor theory of value? Cheers, ajit sinha
Dr Michael Williams
Economics and Social Sciences
De Montfort University
Milton Keynes

[This message may be in html, and any attachments may be in MSWord 97. If
you have difficulty reading either, please let me know.]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 27 2000 - 15:27:08 EST